The Syrian people have paid a heavy price for the tyranny and crimes of one of the most brutal military-security regimes in modern history.
Nearly a million martyrs, missing persons, and forcibly disappeared individuals, in addition to tens of thousands of "living martyrs" who miraculously survived the human slaughterhouses and torture chambers of the Assad regime's security apparatus.
This tragedy, with its exceptional historical significance, necessitates the development of a security and judicial system commensurate with the immense price the Syrian people have paid. In simpler terms: Syrians deserve to live without fear of the security forces—any security forces.
Historically, torture was not part of the structure of the Syrian state or the culture of its institutions in the post-independence era. However, the fangs of the "security state" began to emerge during the union with Egypt under Gamal Abdel Nasser, when Abdel Hamid al-Sarraj's security apparatus was given free rein to protect the union from "traitors"—and that is where the story of the ordeal in the security prisons began.
The practices of the security apparatus escalated sharply after the 1963 coup, which established a sectarian regime cloaked in the guise of nationalism and socialism. Throughout the 1960s and continuing into the Assad era, these agencies transformed into repressive institutions that devised methods of psychological and physical torture exceeding in their brutality and criminality even those employed by the most notorious secret services of the 20th century, including the Stasi in East Germany and the Soviet KGB.
Given this horrific legacy, dismantling a security system that has persisted for decades requires radical structural reform, not superficial solutions. The act of torture committed by any security officer today transcends the bounds of individual transgression; it constitutes a blatant violation of the blood of hundreds of thousands of detainees and martyrs. Therefore, the punishment must be severe—up to and including the death penalty—and must extend to both the perpetrator and the one who ordered the torture: not only to those who carried it out, but also to those who issued the order, those who granted the authority, and those who failed to hold anyone accountable.
The Labyrinth of the "Grievance Bureau" and the Distortion of Institutions
Some propose establishing what is known as the "Grievance Bureau" as a solution to address these violations, drawing inspiration from the experiences of some Arab countries.
This bureau might superficially alleviate the problem of handling complaints, but in essence, it represents a setback for the process of building institutions in modern Syria. The decisions of the Grievance Bureau are merely non-binding administrative recommendations requiring the approval of the executive authority, while deterring serious violations such as torture necessitates enforceable judicial rulings, without any means of circumventing them. After all that has happened, the fundamental constitutional rights of Syrian citizens cannot be reduced to mere complaints and appeals lacking legal deterrent power.
The true solution to prevent a recurrence of the tragedy rests on two main pillars:
● A deterrent internal inspection and security apparatus: responsible for monitoring the performance of security personnel, overseeing the conduct of agencies, and regulating them according to strict legal controls, in a public and transparent manner.
● A fully independent judiciary: possessing absolute authority to enter and conduct surprise inspections of all detention centers, and to initiate public prosecutions against any security official, regardless of rank, without requiring prior approval from any political or executive body.
Herein lies the importance of the principle of separation of powers, which is the dividing line between a state governed by the rule of law and a state where security agencies may become unchecked. Confining the power of accountability to an independent judiciary, not subordinate to the executive branch, ensures that no authority—no matter how powerful—can provide cover for perpetrators of violations, or even simply fail to hold them accountable.
Certainly, this does not mean that the current political leadership and security apparatus condone or permit torture, as some media opportunists might claim, exploiting any negative incidents to attack the new regime.
But good intentions alone are not a guarantee for the future. Taking decisive measures to prevent the resurgence of abuses by members of the security services is what the Syrian people richly deserve, after having paid such a heavy price.
Mohammed Al-Hussam - Zaman Al-Wasl
Comments About This Article
Please fill the fields below.